Modal verbs

“You shall stay just where you are!” his mother cried angrily

He shall do as I say.

The meaning of obligation may also be traced in interrogative sentences where shall is used with the first and third persons to ask after the will of the person addressed. In this case it is also followed by the simple infinitive.

E.g. Shall I get you some fresh coffee, Miss Flour?

Who shall answer the telephone, Major?

Sentences of this kind are usually rendered in Russian with the help of the infinitive: Принести Вам ещё кофе? Кому отвечать по телефону? etc.

Should

In modern English the modal verb should is used with reference to the present or future. It remains unchanged in reported speech.

Should has the following meanings:

obligation, which in different contexts may acquire additional shades of meaning, such as advisability and desirability,

E.g. It’s late. You should go to bed.

You shouldn’t miss the opportunity.

Should I talk to him about it?

He said that the status of the Greek minority should be viewed in the light of political balance. (Moscow news)

He said that this was not a temporary problem. Lasting arrangements should be made. (W. Faulkner)

Should in this meaning is found in all kinds of sentences. Like ought to it generally refers an action to the future and followed by the simple infinitive.

With reference to the resent should is used with the Continuous Infinitive or with the simple infinitive if the verb is stative.

E.g. You shouldn’t be sitting in home. Move out of it into the garden.

You shouldn’t feel so unhappy over such trifles.

Should may be combined with the Perfect Infinitive. In this case the meaning of the combination depends on whether the sentence is affirmative or negative. In an affirmative sentence should + Perfect Infinitive indicates that a desirable action was not carried out.

E.g. He looks very ill. He should have stayed at home.

He should have told me about it himself.

In a negative sentence should + Perfect Infinitive serves to show that an undesirable action was carried out.

E.g. Oh, John, you shouldn’t have done as you did.

They shouldn’t have concealed it from us.

supposition implying strong probability,

E.g. The film should be very good as it is starring first-class actors.

The use of should in this case does not seem to be very common as this meaning is usually rendered by must.

In addition to the above mentioned cases showing the independent use of should this verb occurs in certain object clauses where it depends on the lexical character of the predicate verb in the principal clause and in adverbial clauses of condition, purpose and concession.

E.g. I suggest hat you should stay here as if nothing had happened.

“It’s important,” I broke out, “that the people should know what we’ve just heard.”

She was terrified lest they should goon talking about her.

Should may have a peculiar function - it may be used for emotional coloring. In this function it may be called the emotional should. The use of the emotional should is structurally dependent.

It is found in the following cases:

In special emphatic constructions where a simple predicate is not used:

in rhetorical questions beginning with why,

E.g. Why should I do it? (С какой стати я буду это делать?)

Why shouldn't you invite him? (Почему бы Вам его не пригласить?)

in object clauses beginning with why,

E.g. I don’t know why he should want to see him (Я не знаю зачем он ему нужен)

I don’t see why we shouldn’t make friends.

in attributive clauses beginning with why after the noun reason,

E.g. There is no reason why they shouldn’t get on very well together (Нет причины почему бы им не ладить дpуг с другом).

in constructions of the following kind,

E.g. The door opened and who should come in but Tom (Дверь открылась, и, кто бы Вы думали, вошёл? Никто иной, как Том)

As I was crossing the street, whom should I meet but Aunt Ann.

in the set phrase How should I know? (Почём я знаю?) In the above cases should may be followed by the Perfect infinitive which in simple sentences refers the action to the past and in complex sentences shows that the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the principal clause.

E.g. I went into business with her as her partner. Why shouldn’t I have done it? (Почему бы мне не сделать это?)

He didn’t know why he should have expected them to look different (Он не знал почему ожидал увидеть их с другими).

In certain types of subordinate clauses where should + infinitive is interchangeable with a simple predicate in the Indicative Mood:

in object clauses after expressions of regret, surprise, sometimes pleasure or displeasure,

E.g. I‘m sorry that you should think so badly of me (Мне жаль, что Вы так плохо обо мне думаете).

He was little surprise that Ann should speak so frankly about it.

I’m content that you should think so.

The rules of the sequence of tenses are not observed here. The Perfect infinitive is used to show that the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the principal clause.

E.g. I am sorry that you should have had a row with Kate about it.

He was annoyed that they should have asked him that.

in object clauses following the principal clause with it as a formal subject,

E.g. It is absurd that such things should happen to a family like theirs (Нелепо, чтобы такие вещи случались в такой семье, как их).

In the principal clause we find such expressions as it is wonderful (absurd, monstrous, natural, odd, queer, singular, strange, terrible and the like), it infuriated, (outraged, puzzled, startled, surprised and the like) me, it struck me as funny, etc. We also find he following interrogative expressions in the principal clause: is it possible (likely, probable)? , it is not possible (likely, probable), it is impossible (improbable, unlikely).

As we see from the above examples, the rules of the sequence of tenses are not observed here either.

If the action of the subordinate clause precedes that of the principal clause, the Perfect infinitive is used after should.

E.g. It is inconceivable that Mrs. C. should have written such a letter.

It is much better that you should have found everything out before it’s too late.

in constructions of the following kind,

E.g. That it should come to this! (И до чего дело дошло!)

To think that it should come to this! (Подумать только, до чего дело дошло!)

To think that it should have happened to me! (Подумать только, что это произошло со мной!)

Some literary examples:

It is good that the Government should have recognized the opportunity and the obligations so clearly. (E. Hermingway)

To sum it up, it should be said that as compared to the use of a simple predicate in the Indicative Mood, the use of should + infinitive gives the statement emotional coloring such as surprise, amazement, irritation, indignation, pleasure, displeasure etc, i.e. it emphasizes the speaker’s personal attitude towards the facts stated in the sentence. The Indicative Mood represents these acts in a more matter-of-fact way.

Must, should and ought to compared.

All the three verbs serve to express obligation. Must, however, sounds more forceful, peremptory.

E.g. You must do it at once (Вы должны сделать это немедленно!).

Both should and ought to express obligation, advisability and desirability and are used when must would sound too peremptory.

E.g. You should do /ought to do/ it at once (Вам следует/надо/нужно сделать это немедленно).

Should and ought to are very much alike in meaning and are often interchangeable. In using ought to, however, we lay more stress on the meaning of moral obligation, whereas should is common in instruction and corrections.

E.g. You ought to help him; he is in trouble.

You should use the definite article in this sentence.

Must, ought to and should serve to express supposition implying strong probability. Must, however, seems to be in more frequent use than the other two verbs.

Should + Perfect Infinitive, ought to + Perfect Infinitive and was, were to + Perfect Infinitive compared.

Should + Perfect infinitive and ought to + Perfect infinitive show that the action has not been carried out though it was desirable; was/were to + Perfect infinitive indicate an action that has not been carried out though it was planned.

E.g. You should have helped him.

You ought to have warned him (Now she is in trouble).

He was to have arrived last week (but his plans were upset by some cause or other).

Will

The verb will has the following forms: will – the present tense and would – the past tense. The latter form is used in two ways:

in past-time context to express an actual fact and

in present-time context to express unreality or as a milder and more polite form of will.

Will and would may also be used as verbs of full predication (not modal verbs). Will may be used as a regular verb (wills, willed). It means проявлять волю, заставлять, внушать. Would s a defective verb. It is used with reference to the present and means “ желать”. It is found mainly in poetry and like the verb to wish is followed by an object clause: I would I were a careless child.

While shall and should are treated as two different verbs in modern English, will and would are considered to be the forms of the same verb, its original meaning being that of volition (Volition is a general term which includes such meanings as willingness, readiness, consent, intention and determination to perform an action). However, in some of their meanings the use of will is parallel only to would which denotes an actual fact in the past; in other meanings will is found alongside would which expresses unreality in the present or serves as a milder or more polite form of will.

The use of will and would which denotes an actual fact in the past is parallel in the following cases:

when they express habitual or recurrent actions,

E.g. She will (would) sit for hours under the old oak tree looking at the beautiful country around her (…любит/любила сидеть, обычно сидит/сидела …)

In addition to indicating an habitual action, will (would) in this case implies willingness, personal interest on the part of the doer of the action. Will (would) in this meaning is found in affirmative sentences and is followed by he simple infinitive.

In present-time context will in this meaning is not common. In past-time context would is mainly characteristic of literary style.

E.g. Then there were weekends when he would ride over to the house of one farmer or another and spend a couple of nights on the hills.

when they express refusal to perform an action,

E.g. The doctor knows I won’t be operated on.

He was wet through but he wouldn’t change.

“Clark,” she said softly, “I wouldn’t change you for the world”. (F. Scott Fitzgerald)

This meaning is found in negative sentences; will (would) is followed by the simple infinitive. In Russian it is usually rendered as никак не хочу, ни за что не хотел.

when they are used with lifeless things to show hat a thing fails to perform its immediate function,

E.g. My fountain pen won’t (wouldn’t) write.

The door won’t (wouldn’t) open.

In this meaning will (would) is found in negative sentences and is followed by the simple infinitive. In Russian it is usually rendered as никак не пишет (не писала), никак не открывается (не открывалась) and the like.

when they are used with the first person to express will, intention or determination,

E.g. “Damn it!” he thought, “I’m going to get out of this hole. I will make money. I am an Englishman and I will suffer no priest to interfere in my business”.

“I said I would do anything for him. We decided that we wouldn’t interfere”.

This meaning is found in affirmative and negative sentences. The present tense will, in addition to expressing